13 January 2021 Report to: South Cambridgeshire District Council Planning Committee
Lead Officer: Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development
S/3290/19/RM – Land East of Teversham Road, Fulbourn
Proposal: Approval of matters reserved for appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following Outline planning permission S/0202/17/OL for the development of 110 dwellings with areas of landscaping and public open space and associated infrastructure works
Applicant: Castlefield International Limited
Key material considerations: Compliance with the Outline Planning Permission Housing Provision (including affordable housing) Open Space Provision The Reserved Matters: Layout Scale Appearance Landscape Biodiversity Flood Risk and Drainage Highway Safety, Management of Roads and Parking Residential Amenity Heritage Assets Other matters
Date of Member site visit: None
Is it a Departure Application: Yes (advertised 2nd October 2019)
Decision due by: 18th January 2021 (Extension of time agreed)
Application brought to Committee because: Fulbourn Parish Council requests the application is determined by Planning Committee
Officer Recommendation: Approval
Presenting officer: Katie Christodoulides, Principal Planning Officer
Executive Summary
1. This application seeks reserved matters approval for the appearance, layout, scale of buildings and landscaping following the principle of residential development of the site for 110 dwellings being established under outline planning consent S/0202/17/OL, granted on 26th October 2017.
2. The application has been amended by the applicants following consultee comments. The amendments comprise changes to the design, layout, parking layout, mix, drainage, trees, landscaping and dispersion of affordable dwellings.
3. The amendments are considered to further improve the quality of the scheme to ensure that it preserves the character and appearance of the area and fits comfortably within its rural context.
4. The reserved matters details for appearance, layout, scale of the development and landscaping are considered acceptable by officers and the application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.
Relevant planning history
5. S/3209/19/DC- Discharge of conditions 7 (Arboricultural method statement) 8 (Surface water drainage) 12 (Landscape and biodiversity management plan) 14 (Grassland mitigation strategy) 19 and 20 (Noise mitigation strategy) Pursuant to outline planning permission S/0202/17/OL-Current Application.
S/0626/17/E1 - Screening opinion- Not EIA development
S/0202/17/OL- Outline application including consideration of access points for residential development of up to 110 dwellings with areas of landscaping and public open space and associated infrastructure works (S106 secured provision of affordable housing, public open space, general open space and various financial contributions)- Approved.
S/2273/14/OL (APP/W0530/W/15/3139730) – Outline application including consideration of access points for high quality residential development of up to 110 dwellings with areas of landscaping and public open space and associated infrastructure works- Refused and dismissed on appeal.
Planning policies
National Guidance
6. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2019 National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) National Design Guide 2019 Planning Practice Guidance Circular 11/95 – The use of conditions in Planning Permissions (Annex A)
South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018
7. S/1 Vision S/2 Objectives of the Local Plan S/3 Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development S/5 Provision of New Jobs and Homes S/6 The Development Strategy S/7 Development Frameworks S/10 Group Villages HQ/1 Design Principles H/8 Housing Density H/9 Housing Mix H/10 Affordable Housing H/12 Residential Space Standards NH/2 Protecting and Enhancing Landscape Character NH/3 Protecting Agricultural Land NH/4 Biodiversity NH/5 Local Green Space NH/14 Heritage Impact CC/1 Mitigation and Adaption to Climate Change CC/3 Renewable and Low Carbon Energy in New Developments CC/4 Water Efficiency CC/9 Managing Flood Risk SC/6 Indoor Community Facilities SC/7 Outdoor Playspace, Informal Open Space, and New Developments SC/8 Open Space Standards SC/12 Contaminated Land TI/2 Planning for Sustainable Travel TI/3 Parking Provision TI/8 Infrastructure and New Developments TI/10 Broadband
South Cambridgeshire LDF Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD):
8. Open Space in New Developments SPD - Adopted January 2009 Biodiversity SPD - Adopted July 2009 Trees & Development Sites SPD - Adopted January 2009 Landscape in New Developments SPD - Adopted March 2010 Affordable Housing SPD - Adopted March 2010 District Design Guide SPD - Adopted March 2010 Public Art SPD- Adopted 2009 Health Impact Assessment SPD – March 2011 Greater Cambridge Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document- Adopted January 2020 Fulbourn Village Design Guide, Adopted January 2020 Fulbourn Conservation Area Appraisal Adopted January 2008 Fulbourn Neighbourhood Plan - A neighbourhood area has been designated for Fulbourn in August 2018 and the Neighbourhood Plan is currently being prepared to carry out the pre-submission (Reg 14) consultation.
(The Fulbourn Neighbourhood Plan is therefore afforded no weight in the assessment and determination of the Reserved Matters application, as detailed in Paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework).
Consultation
Fulbourn Parish Council- Raise objections:.
9. The site is unable to support the development of 110 dwellings while satisfying both national and local planning legislation or the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework and South Cambridgeshire Local Plan, the Fulbourn Village Design Guide SPD and the conditions pertaining to the Outline Planning Approval S/0202/17/OL. The Parish reiterates concerns regarding the long term maintenance of surface water drainage and open spaces which do not appear to have been properly addressed. There is no assurance that Cox’s Drove will only be used by pedestrians, cyclists, and emergency vehicles. Inadequate accessible public open space for recreation is proposed due to the need for green spaces to contribute to retention, mitigation and translocation of the existing flora and fauna biodiversity, and for their use as surface water retention facilities via bio-retention attenuation basins and to accommodate potential flooding and high water table
The proposals do not adequately discharge conditions 12 and 14 of the outline permission. The development results in a significant negative biodiversity impact resulting in the need for offsite compensation. There has been minor modifications to address some of the concerns particularly relating to car parking provision to the block of flats. Concern over the location of the rented and shared ownership dwellings which are exclusively located in block of flats, either adjacent to the chalk stream or in the area to the north of the west field opposite the adjacent industrial site.
The incorporation of all rented and shared-ownership homes into two and three storey blocks of flats is socially questionable.
The proposals do not achieve the aims of the Fulbourn Village Design Guide and do not take into account the design guidance in the Fulbourn Village Guide which aims to ensure that new development is of high quality design and sympathetic to the character of, and vision for Fulbourn.
The design of the claimed pedestrian, cycle and emergency only access from the development onto Cox’s Drove will not prevent its use by lorries, some vans and high wheeled-base cars such as SUVs and 4X4s. Cox’s Drove is not suitable for this potential increase in traffic.
The three storey blocks of flats are of poor architectural design and inappropriate in a rural and village context, detrimental to the setting of Poor Well in the Conservation Area, and intrude on the necessarily wide wildlife corridor along the line of the chalk stream.
The site cannot accommodate as many as 110 dwellings on the site without compromising the existing biodiversity and associated water remine and at the same time providing acceptable living conditions at this density.
The Section 106 has not been addressed.
Teversham Parish Council- Raise Objections
10. Raise concerns regarding the affordable housing being situated all in one area and appears to be all in flats. The affordable housing should be dotted around the development and offer a mix of housing types. What has been done to mitigate building on a flood plain, manage the chalk streams, aquifers and springs, preserve the original grass land and maintain biodiversity. There were concerns regarding noise pollution where dwellings are planned close to existing industrial buildings, Teversham Road and the railway line.
District Councillor for Fen Ditton and Fulbourn Ward (Cllr Cone)- Raised objections:
11. Comments on amendments- Objects and raises concerns about risk of flooding, how water across the site will be managed in terms of surface water, open spaces, preserving chalk streams and how it will be managed/funded in perpetuity. The proposal does not provide the recommended 40% affordable housing with this reserved matters application. It provides no self-build housing or electric charging point facilities anywhere across the site. The affordable housing is all grouped together and not spread across the site. Concerns regarding access to the site via Cox’s Drove. The access should be for emergency vehicles, worried this will be used as a through route into the village via Cox’s Drove which is unsuitable for that amount of traffic. Biodiversity should be acceptable not just in the short term but long term with provision put in place for ongoing management. Concerns that the amended plans and documents do not fully consider the village design statement especially with regard to visual impact, heights of buildings and keeping Fulbourn a village amongst trees.
District Councillor for Fen Ditton and Fulbourn Ward (Cllr Daunton) – Raised Objections:
12. Comments on amendments- There should not be removal or replanting of any grass land as preservation of retained grassland is a key component of a landscape that makes effective provision for biodiversity.
Comments on application- The application continues not to take account of the principles of the Village Design Guide for Fulbourn. It does not follow policy in relation to design principles, there is no indication of actions to mitigate climate change or provide biodiversity gain. No provision has been made for self-build dwellings and the requirements for affordable housing provisions have still not been met.
The proposal and amended plans do not take into account the guidance on page 16 of the Village Design Statement and two previous pages relating to the general integration of larger developments within the village.
Two and a half storey apartment blocks and individual dwellings with roofs of a similar height do not preserve the rural character of the area, nor does the grouped scheme of dwellings preserve the linear arrangement of the adjacent village buildings and tree scape.
The amendments fail to take into account the recommendations of the National Design Guide 2019 which ensures the delivery of dwellings that are not only well designed and capable of being well maintained over time, but are sensitive to location.
The scheme fails to take account of the current future effects of climate change in particular the opportunities for water recycling and for electric charging points.
The scheme does not meet the 40% requirement for affordable provision.
District Councillor for Fen Ditton and Fulbourn Ward Cllr Williams—Raised Objections
13. Comments on amendments- Objects as the application fails to comply with policies as adopted by South Cambridgeshire Local Plan, the National House Building Design Guide and the Fulbourn Village Design Guide. Fails to have regard to Policies HQ/1, NH/2, CC/1, H/9, H/10, SC/10 and Fulbourn Village Design Guide by failing to preserve and enhance the existing building rooflines which are consistently below the tree crowns around the site, sustain and enhance the characteristic short distance views from inside the village to open landscape at the Poor Well and deliver buildings that are not repetitive and aligned to avoid massing and form of perimeter blocks. The design of the dwellings particularly the urban style apartment blocks in the development fall far short of the guidance in that they fail to respond to and are not appropriate for the existing character and identity of the rural environment of the site and its surroundings as stated in the National House Building Design Guide. The proposed height of the apartment blocks and individual dwellings do not preserve or enhance the rural area and fail to take account of the wider landscape. The siting of these dwellings, adjacent to Meadow Park which performs a green link from the Poorwell through to the open fields of the Fulbourn Fen create by virtue of their height, mass and size an urban character at odds with the very rural nature of the landscape to the north of Cow Lane, Fulbourn. The dwellings located along the northern boundary of the site would be subject to noise and air pollution from the existing Breckenwood Industrial Estate. The current Local Transport Plan for Cambridgeshire adopted by the County Council in March 2014 includes a rail station in the vicinity of Teversham Road by 2031, applicant has failed to consider these future impacts on the development
Anglian Water- Has no objection
14. There are assets owned by Anglian Water close to or crossing the site therefore requests an informative is added to any consent granted to require the layout to take this into count and if not practicable then sewers will need to be diverted at the developers cost. The foul drainage from the development is in the catchment of Cambridge Water Recycling Centre that will have available capacity for these flows. The site falls within a Source Protection Zone, and there is no risk to potable water source.
Archaeology Officer - Has no objection
15. An archaeological evaluation has already been conducted within the redline indicated against the outline application which identified a low density of archaeological features in the eastern half of the development area comprising undated pits of possible prehistoric date and unknown function, and the ditches of a post-medieval drainage system (Cambridgeshire Historic Environment record reference ECB4441). No further archaeological works are required in mitigation of the development impacts and do not consider the inclusion of an archaeological condition to be necessary.
SCDC Contaminated Land Officer- No objection.
16. As part of the Outline Consent, the Geosphere Phases I and II report were reviewed and no conditions were required. The reserved matters do not include any further pertinent information with regard to contaminated land and therefore no further comments to make.
County Council Transport Assessment Team-
17. No formal comments to make.
Designing Out Crime Officer- Has no objection
18. Comments on application-The proposed layout appears to provide high levels of natural surveillance with pedestrian and vehicle routes aligned together and high levels of natural surveillance should be achieved from neighbours. Supportive of layout in terms of both affordable and private housing. Vehicle parking is predominantly in-curtilage to the front and sides of properties, allowing owners the ability to view their vehicles from inside their homes from active windows. Requests to be consulted in regard to lighting and wayfinding lighting for public space areas when available.
SCDC Sustainable Drainage Engineer – No objection
19. Original comments – there is significant surface water flooding on the proposed site and a considerable amount of modelling and assessment was undertaken at outline stage that took this flow route into account and managed it in the landscape. It is not clear if this approach has been carried through to the final design. Further information required.
Following previous amendments- The development proposal is unacceptable and should be refused. The information previously requested is relevant, the information is fundamental to the proposed strategy and is therefore required at this stage to ensure sustainable principles are fully examined and can be technically assessed at this point, prior to further design evolution.
Following previous amendments-Design and modelling needs to be revisited and updated information.
Following the latest amendments- The development is acceptable.
SCDC Ecology Officer- No objection.
20. Previous concerns regarding insufficient information to demonstrate compliance with the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in relation to reptiles and net loss of biodiversity contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy NH/4 of the Local Plan.
Following the latest amendment- The amendments have removed previous concerns and that the application can move to determination without ecology and biodiversity being of further material concern. The applicant has submitted an updated Landscape and Biodiversity Management Plan. The plan includes as appendices a scheme for general grassland mitigation and translocation, chalk stream habitat restoration plan, reptile mitigation strategy and biodiversity offsetting calculations.
Environment Agency- No objection.
21. No objection in principle to the proposal provided all outstanding pre- commencement conditions are discharged prior to development.
SCDC Environmental Health Officer- No objection.
22. Condition 16 of the outline permission required submission of a Construction Environmental Management Plan, which will include controls on construction noise, dust, building site activities of working and delivery times. No new conditions are necessary, however a condition is recommended in regard to piling operations.
Conditions 19 and 20 of the Outline consent require provision of noise assessments. Condition 19 has been recommended for discharge and condition 20 can only be discharged after completion and post construction noise testing has been carried out. Having reviewed the Noise Assessment Report, agrees with the findings and conclusions and comments that most of the site is not contentious. The blocks within the north western corner (blocks C, C1, D, D1) next to Breckenwood Industrial Estate are within the 50 metre exclusion zone imposed by condition 20 of the outline consent. With suitable mitigation, these apartment blocks provide a shielding effect to the rest of the development whilst providing the residents of these premises with an appropriate level of protection. The mitigation will enable building to occur within the 50 metre exclusion zone. It can be seen that predicted noise levels within habitable rooms will meet the recommendations contained within BS8233 2014 and sufficient mitigation has been recommended when based on the external noise levels modelled across the site.
Condition 18 relates to lighting and condition 17 waste management from the outline consent and no further conditions are required.
Historic Officer- No objection.
23. Previous concerns- Visual and historic significance of the Poor Well area of the conservation area and the views northwards from Cow Lane across Poors Well to the open land beyond. The landscaped area in the south-west part of the site lies within Fulbourn Conservation Area, forming part of the grounds of the historic waterworks and driveway from the original gate lodge to the main pumping station building passed through this space. The historic and architectural significance of this part of the Conservation Area depend on the understanding and relationship of the waterworks buildings and landscape as a group. Detail of the treatment of the existing driveway to be retained is recommended via condition.
Following the latest amendments - Note the comments made by the Inspector at the appeal on this site, and acknowledge that it has been accepted that the impact on the Poors Well part of the Conservation Area will not be significant. The comments on the original driveway to the waterworks have not been addressed and a condition would be appropriate requiring this detail.
Housing Officer- No objection.
24. Previous concerns- The tenure mix does not meet the requirement of 70% affordable rent and 30% shared ownership. The accessible dwellings have not been identified on the plans. Disappointing that there is only the provision of flats for the affordable and not some houses. There are no flats offered for the private market provision therefore visually will be evident which units are affordable. Disappointing that all the affordable rent units are located to the north west of the site overlooking a commercial site.
Following Amendments- The applicant has worked with the Housing Strategy Team to amend the housing mix by reducing the number of 2 bedroom flats by 4 and replaced with 2 bedroom houses. The S106 allows for up to 20 affordable housing units to be clustered together. With the addition of the houses, the affordable units are spread out further into the site.
Landscape Officer- No objection.
25. Previous concerns- Insufficient information for both hard and soft landscape works. The soft landscaping is not of a high quality and fails to integrate the development with its surroundings, contrary to Policy HQ/1 and NH/6 of the Local Plan. Parking dominates the street scene, trees and shrub planting beds to break this up, parking bays to be integrated into the site than stand alone, hard paving area to front of plots 64-67 and 75-77 to be reduced, request for further tree planting, shrub planting, headwalls and culverts to respect the local landscape character, boundary treatment around meadow and linear part to be removed, vehicular bridge and foot bridge details required.
Following the latest amendments- supports the proposals.
Lead Local Flood Authority- No objection-
26. Previous concerns- There is a surface water flow path through the development which creates a significant level of flood risk through the development. It is acknowledged that the applicant has designed the site to ensure there are no buildings within the flow path.
The proposals are to drain surface water through permeable paving and attenuation basins around the development before discharging into the watercourse that flows through the centre of the site. The half drain times have been reduced, and there is adequate attenuation to receive the follow up 10 year storm within 24 hours of a 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) 7 day storm including climate change.
Cambridgeshire County Council (Highways Development Control) - No objection.
27. The Highway Authority can confirm that they will not be adopting any part of this development in its present format. Requests conditions in regard to proposed arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development and visibility splays. Comments that the refuse vehicle swept path analysis is acceptable. Vehicular access (for 8 units or below if remaining private i.e. 74/81 and 64/71) should be constructed using dropped kerbs rather than the radii ones as shown. The proposed car parking layout appears to show that the length of some of the Plots: 1 /2 /20 89/95/96 and 97 driveways are excessively long.
Sport England- No objection.
28. The proposed development does not fall within either the statutory remit or non-statutory remit, therefore Sport England has not provided a detailed response.
Sustainability Officer
29. No comments to make on the application.
Tree Officer- No objection.
30. Previous concerns- Chalk planting mixes does not reflect or contrast with the woodlands and treescapes, the proposed treescape is different to the sylvan character of Fulbourn, clarity needed in regards to SUDs and the impact on existing and future trees, clarification over Linear Park and tree species, the attenuation basins by the trees not entering the RPA but would have to be carefully managed to ensure does not creep into the exclusion zone, clarification needed that planting in Meadow Park would not create conflict with soft landscaping and SUDs, up to date Tree Survey required, Landscape and Biodiversity Management Plan and Landscape Plans need to match, tree watering details insufficient and planting schedule insufficient.
Supports the proposal subject to a condition in regard to tree pit details.
Urban Design Officer- No objection.
31. Officers consider further improvements can be made to the scheme and also suggest some planning conditions. Improvements to the character of the short streets (north and south of Linear Park) to be more like courtyards, addressing 2 instances of where dwellings are not meeting the minimum distances for ensuring residential amenity stipulated in guidance in the District Design Guide, increasing the rear garden area of plot 57 to meet the criteria for minimum residential amenity space in the District Design Guide, providing several rather than just one tree for the communal amenity spaces of the apartment blocks A, C, C1, D and D1 and elevation treatments of some apartments and houses needs to be improved in terms of their detailed design and materiality. Recommends conditions in regard to details for the position of meter cupboards and details of the vehicular bridge.
Representations from members of the public
32. 64 representations have been received from neighbours opposing the scheme, 0 supporting the scheme and 1 neither supporting nor objecting. These representations are summarised below:
Biodiversity:
Water vole seen in the stream which bisects the development. It would be impossible to complete the development without damaging, destroying or obstructing access to any structure or place which water voles use for shelter or protection. The proposed path running all round the site including the back of the gardens of the houses fronting Cow Lane is not acceptable as the fields are wildlife sanctuaries and merge into the back gardens of the existing properties. Unaware of measures to alleviate the environmental impact of the development. Fencing between the proposed development and existing dwellings is of concern as it presents issues of security and loss of light as well as hindering the movement of wildlife. Lizards and ground birds alongside a vast amount of wildlife use the field as a route. Surrounding trees provide habitat for bats, owls, birds of prey, woodpeckers and other bird life. All houses should have provision for bat and swift boxes. Low levels of lighting is essential to protect wildlife and not add to light pollution. Sustainability of the open areas and ecological conditions
Trees and Landscaping:
Screening of native hedges and tree planting. Lack of proposed trees. Mature planting and trees should be planted to screen the footpath from residents and improve the landscaping.
Land on corner of Cox’s Drove and Cow Lane:
Lack of management of the land on the corner of Cox’s Drove and Cow Lane, when ivy and blackberry become too overgrown, drivers cannot see safely to drive from Cox’s Drove into Cow Lane.
Visual Impact:
Concerns regarding open views from Cow Lane by Poor Well across the site and chalk stream. Disappointed by the architectural quality of the proposed dwellings. Urban character which is a poor fit with the Fulbourn Conservation Area. The proposal does nothing to enhance a unique area of the village with offering views from the adjacent sites of the Horse Pond and Poor Well (in Cow Lane) across Fulbourn Fen towards the villages agricultural green belt. No attempt to present sympathetic design and landscaping to compliment a rural boundary to the village. The proposed development will change the view and extend the urban environment past the existing limits and into the green fields beyond. The old Cambridge Water pump house in Cow Lane is a unique building and the developer should not have attempted to copy its build materials, particularly as they will not be using welsh roofing slates. The view from Poor Well is unchanged and may actually be more obstructive. Three storey houses are completely out of character in this rural setting. Poor design means cramped conditions internally and too many houses on site. Density out of place in village setting. Unconvincing design and the three character areas. Houses have relatively high pitched roofs which will overpower the adjacent, existing houses in Cow Lane. Building in the open spaces around the Poor Well will degrade the setting and result in loss of aesthetic amenity for those who live in the village. Three storey houses are out of character with the rural setting. The proposed layout and design of the dwellings is unimaginative and inappropriate to a development on a boundary between open fenland countryside and a quiet rural village lane (Cow Lane). Flats are inappropriate in a rural location. Roof height of houses is too high and pitches too steep.
Heritage Impact:
Effect on adjacent listed buildings, conservation area and archaeological interest. Poor Well is a historic and aesthetic asset to the village and should be protected, not spoiled. Building in open spaces round Poor Well will degrade the setting and result in loss of aesthetic amenity for those who live in the village.
Emergency Access:
Ensure vehicular access to and from Cox’s Drove will be restricted to emergency vehicles and not refuse vehicles.
Flooding and Drainage:
Concerned about very high flood risk to property from the development Inadequate modelling of the flood risk and surface water maintenance Concern regarding severe flash flooding locally has led to a smell of sewage. The proposed site of the development floods regularly with both flash and prolonged flooding. Water table is no more than 25-30 cm from surface, severe risk of flooding and modelling of flood risk that extends beyond the boundaries of the proposed development. The surface water management plan contains models which do not extend beyond the development boundary. There are no barriers to surface water flow from the development into existing properties to the east Cox’s Drove or south Cow Lane. The proposal will increase flood risk to adjacent properties. The creation of retention ponds just inside the boundary of the development immediately to the north of the existing Cow Lane properties will cause run off into adjacent existing properties. Risk to Horse Pond and associated streams within the Poorwell Water Conservation Area. Flooding towards the end of Teversham Road by the level crossing. Well known flooding in Thomas Road and Roberts Way, to the west side of Teversham Road. Concerns over a management company being set up to deal with drainage. The proposals do not adequately discharge condition 8 of the Outline Consent. The details do not include long term ownership and adoption of the surface water drainage and maintenance of the same. The long term viability of the site maintenance must be answered before planning approval of reserved matters. High water table is not suitable for building. In Cow Lane problems with sewerage systems. The chalk streams that run through the proposed area are already suffering excessive drainage due to building. The drainage ditches along the east side of Teversham Road are silted up. The site being a flood area would put new owners at risk. Sewers cannot cope with the present houses and not the number proposed. Concerns over the unsatisfactory and untried drainage system with no guarantee the developer can provide the necessary maintenance of the proposed drainage system as well as maintenance of open spaces in perpetuity.
Neighbour Amenity:
Noise, loss of privacy and overshadowing. Lack of provision of a visual and physical barrier between the development and the house in Cow Lane (48-60). Concerns regarding the siting of the proposed new electricity sub station being too close to existing residents and noise generated. No windows should face existing properties.
Residential Amenity for future residents
Cramped internal conditions New developments need to have either larger gardens to permit and encourage growing food, or developers need to provide alternative land for additional allotments. Housing is too cramped together with inadequate public open space for recreation. Will lead to social division in the community. The serene green setting around Poor Well provides a valuable function in improving and maintaining the mental wellbeing of those who live in or visit the area.
Noise:
Concerns over noise from piling and construction. -Concerns over building house foundations using a piling rig would produce a level of noise pollution that would make the adjacent environment and lives of the current residents totally unacceptable. Pile driving and working hours should be monitored in terms of disruption to the village. Working hours on the site should be set and strictly monitored to 8-4 Monday to Friday with no weekend working. Consideration of health and safety implications of the railway boundary fencing and/ or additional hedge and tree screening of the Breckenwood Industrial Estate.
Highway Safety and Traffic Impact:
Increased traffic along Cow Lane. Pedestrian and cycle routes exit onto Cox’s Drove appears a poor choice. Concern regarding heavy machinery moving along Cow Lane during building work. Unsafe for vehicles, cyclists or pedestrians to access the site through the front garden of The Gate Lodge, 2 Hinton Road. Concerns over highway safety of the proposed access. Teversham Road being a fast road with zero speed restrictions or crossings for children. One access point should be sufficient and direct pedestrians and people on their bikes to the green space. Having two pathways creates problems. Oppose an exit for the housing in Cox’s Drove. The road Apthorpe Street to Cow Lane is narrow and winding and unsuitable to sustain any more traffic. Provision of parking for all construction workers should be before work commences and on site rather than nearby streets. Object to the pedestrian access from Cow Lane through the Pumphouse gardens on the grounds of security and privacy to the owners of the Lodge Gate House and the deep water with steep banks in the gardens being a danger to children. No access to the site should be permitted to construction vehicles via Cox’s Drove, no construction vehicles via Cow Lane and Apthorpe Street and no parking on nearby roads. Inadequate levels of car parking.
Parking:
Limited parking around the school and people tend to park in residential roads.
Cycle and Wheelie Bin Storage:
The flats have insufficient storage for cycles. Inadequate cycle and wheelie bin storage.
Facilities and Services in Fulbourn:
The school and pre-school are not big enough for an influx of new children. Lack of community facilities at this end of the village and existing school will not have capacity for the extra pupils generated.
Fulbourn Forum for Community Action:
Comments received in support of objections raised by the Fulbourn Forum for Community Action.
Affordable Housing
Putting all the affordable, rented, shared ownership housing in flats, in the corners is wrong.
Section 106 Agreement:
S106 has not been addressed.
Fulbourn Village Design Guide:
Compliance with Fulbourn Village Design Guide which the application fails to do.
Compliance with Outline Application:
Lack of compliance with approved plans and conditions at Outline stage.
Fulbourn Forum for Community Action- Objection.
The site is unable to support the development of 110 dwellings while satisfying both national and local planning legislation.
The development does not adequately maintain, enhance, restore or add to the present biodiversity of the two fields and the bisecting chalk stream.
The development results in a significant negative biodiversity impact resulting in the need for offsite compensation. No details of how this can be achieved are given in the application.
The proposals do not adequately discharge Conditions 12 and 14 of the Outline permission. Full details are not given which confirm how the proposed scheme of biodiversity monitoring and management will be effective, deliverable, and funded in perpetuity.
The surface water drainage design and management scheme is untried and untested, it has not been future-proofed in the light of the continuing Climate Emergency, and the precautionary principle has not been applied. In addition, Condition 8 of the Outline Approval has not been adequately discharged as there is no full detail of how the scheme will be monitored, managed and funded in perpetuity.
Inadequate accessible public open space for recreation is provided due to the need for ‘green spaces’ to contribute to the retention, mitigation and translocation of the existing flora and fauna biodiversity, and for their use as surface water retention facilities via bio-retention (attenuation) basins and to accommodate potential flooding/high water table.
The proposals fail to take proper account of the design guidance embedded in the Fulbourn Village Design Guide 2019, which attempts to ensure that new development is of high quality design and sympathetic to the character of, and vision for, Fulbourn.
The 3-storey blocks of flats are of poor architectural design and inappropriate in a rural and village context, detrimental to the setting of Poor Well in the Conservation Area, and intrude on the necessarily wide wildlife corridor along the line of the chalk stream.
The incorporation of all rented and shared-ownership homes (so-called ‘affordable’ homes) into the 2- and 3-storey blocks of flats is socially questionable.
The flats have internal layouts that are not fit for purpose and are undersized. Inadequate cycle storage has been provided in the blocks of flats, and inadequate cycle and wheelie bin storage has been provided to some houses.
The design of the claimed pedestrian, cycle and emergency only access from the development into Cox’s Drove will not prevent its use by lorries, some vans, and high wheel-base cars such as SUVs and 4x4s. The applicant has now confirmed that the access will also be used by the weekly refuse lorries. Cox’s Drove is not suitable for this potential increase in traffic particularly from the 63 dwellings in the eastern field. As presently configured this access and Cox’s Drove is not a safe route for children walking or cycling to the village school.
The site and its surroundings
33. The site lies on the north western edge of Fulbourn. The application site comprises land to the east of Teversham Road, south of the railway line and north of Cows Lane. A small part of the site, the pumphouse garden lies within the Conservation Area and also forms a local green space, the remainder of the site abuts the Fulbourn Conservation Area to the south and south east and is adjacent to the former Fulbourn pumping station. The Green Belt lies to the north of the railway line. The site comprises of 6.85 hectares of undeveloped land which is partitioned by a narrow chalk stream. A small part of the site fronting Cow Lane was formerly an ornamental garden but is now inaccessible and heavily overgrown. The site abuts the Poorwell Water pond which is a protected village amenity and across which a low quality pedestrian access has been informally created. Adjacent to the site lies the former Fulbourn Pumping Station which is listed on the Cambridgeshire Historic Environment Record (HER), noted as a building of importance in the Fulbourn Conservation Area Appraisal and a non designated heritage asset, alongside Gate Lodge and Bakers Arm Public House. Two Sites of Special Scientific Interest are located within 2 km of the site (forming Fulbourn and Great Wilbraham Common). The site lies within Flood Zone 1 (low risk). The site is generally flat, with the field boundaries comprising of hedgerows and mature trees, following the alignment of the linear drains. The fields are open grass land, with the pumphouse garden retaining more ornamental planting although this has become neglected and heavily overgrown.
The proposal
34. This application, as amended, seeks consent for approval of matters reserved for appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following outline planning consent (S/0202/17/OL) which was approved for 110 dwellings.
35. The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 provides a definition of what each of the above reserved matters means in practice:
“layout” means the way in which buildings, routes and open spaces within the development are provided, situated and orientated in relation to each other and to buildings and spaces outside the development.
“scale” means the height, width and length of each building proposed within the development in relation to its surroundings.
“appearance” means the aspects of a building or place within the development which determines the visual impression the building or place makes, including the external built form of the development, its architecture, materials, decoration, lighting, colour and texture. “landscaping” means the treatment of land (other than buildings) for the purpose of enhancing or protecting the amenities of the site and the area in which it is situated and includes; (a) screening by fences, walls or other means; (b) the planting of trees, hedges, shrubs or grass; (c) the formation of banks, terraces or other earthworks; (d) the laying out or provision of gardens, courts, squares, water features, sculpture or public art; and (e) the provision of other amenity features.
36. This application follows the scheme which underwent pre-application planning advice, pre-application workshop and discussion with the Design Enabling Panel (DEP).
37. The application is for 110 dwellings. The proposed layout for the development follows the approved parameter plan under the Outline Consent which detailed the siting of the built form of the development. This comprises of three raised land parcels where development will be located, to the west, north and south, with Meadow Park and Linear Park separating the north and south development parcels. The development is based around the main spine road running west to east through the site, with smaller roads being served off this. A crossing over the chalk stream is provided towards the centre of the site with two further pedestrian bridges to allow connectivity through the site. The proposed layout integrates the landscape, trees, ecology, chalk stream and Pump House pond of the site together.
38. The proposed design and appearance of the development would provide mainly two storey, simple single blocks, steep roofs, rendered or brick, pitched roof design approach with two storey and part two and a half storey apartment buildings. The proposed dwellings within the development incorporate variations in ridge heights, designs, sizes and appearances, with the design cues coming from the character areas of the surrounding village development. Three character areas have been identified within the site.
39. The proposed scale of the development would comprise of single storey garages, two storey dwellings and and apartments, with part two and a half storey corner elements for the apartment buildings (block a and block b). These units all provide key corner frontages and way finding points around the larger open green Meadow Park and are located away from the northern boundary, centrally within the site.
40. Amended plans have been received for the proposal. The application has been amended by the applicants and additional information provided following consultee comments. The amendments comprise the following revisions to the design and layout:
Reduction in the four detached two and a half storey properties to two storey properties, Reduction in the density to the northern boundary parcels, Redesign of the apartment blocks including a reduction in the height and bulk of the apartments to two storey, away from the countryside edge and with a small part being just two and a half storey, General reduction in height of dwellings and more active ground floor frontage, Revised affordable housing to ensure spread across the site and including affordable rented and shared ownership housing, Minor revisions to the window arrangements to create more positive relationships between units and improve surveillance of public spaces, Provision of common amenity spaces to apartment blocks a and b, Revised material palettes to the units, Increased back to back distances, Revision of parking areas to provide an improved landscape led street scene, Introduction of further trees, Removal of the road loop at the eastern end of Linear Park, and Provision of details regarding balconies to the apartments.
41. In terms of ecology, additional information in the form of a Reptile Survey Report and response from the applicant’s Ecologist were provided to address the Ecology Officers points of clarification. In terms of trees, the applicants Tree Specialist clarified the Tree Officers points of clarification.
42. In terms of drainage, the Outline consent established the site suitable for development with an appropriate drainage strategy. Following comments from the Lead Local Floor Authority and Drainage Office, the information supporting the application has been updated.
43. A number of comments have been raised in regard to the sustainability of the proposal and complying with the adopted Local Plan and National Planning Policy Framework, and the proposed access and highway safety. The principle of the development and access were established under the outline planning consent and therefore cannot be considered as part of this Reserved Matters application.
Planning Assessment
Principle of Development
44. The principle of the residential development for up to 110 dwellings (including 30% affordable) with access for the main entrance was established on the site under approved outline planning consent S/0202/17/OL.
45. A number of comments have been received in regard to the proposed number of dwellings and this being inappropriate for the site and Fulbourn village. The principle of development has been established under the outline consent granted under S/0202/17/OL.
46. The key issues to therefore consider in the determination of this Reserved Matters application relate to compliance with the outline planning permission, density, affordable housing, housing mix, the reserved matters (layout, scale, appearance, landscaping), heritage assets, flood risk, highway safety, neighbour amenity, biodiversity and other matters.
Compliance with the Outline Planning Permission
47. Several conditions were imposed on the decision for the outline consent which require compliance at the reserved matters stage.
Condition 4 of the outline consent requires the development to be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans M02 rev C – Site Plan; M06 rev E – Parameters Plan; P2 – 50m Exclusion Zone B; B411/008 Rev 1 – Cox’s Drove Emergency Vehicle Access; and B411/SK/09 Rev 2 – Indicative Full Right Turn.
Condition 5 of the outline consent requires details of the mix of housing (including market and affordable housing) to be submitted with any reserved matters application for housing.
Condition 6 of the outline consent requires detailed plans and particulars of the reserved matters pursuant to Condition 1 to be in general accordance with the illustrative layout (Drawing number ‘M03 Rev C’ subject to taking into account the 50m noise exclusion zone as identified on drawing number ‘P2’.
Condition 28 of the outline consent requires the number of storeys and the height of the eaves and ridge above AOD to any built development to be determined through the reserved matters application.
48. This reserved matters application is considered to comply with conditions 4, 5, 6 and 28 of the outline consent.
Housing Density 49. The overall site measures approximately 6.85 hectares in area. The proposed density of this site would be approximately 16 dwellings per hectare. The net residential area measures 3.31 hectares which would give a density of 33 dwellings per hectare. Alongside the residential development, other areas of the site would consist of the chalk stream, ornamental garden, locally equipped area of play (LEAP) at Meadow Park and open space at Linear Park.
50. The overall proposed density would be below the requirement of an average of 30 dwellings per hectare, however the proposal is considered to be acceptable given the character of the area and sites location, in accordance with Policy H/8 of the Local Plan.
51. Officers consider that the proposed density reflects the density of Fulbourn and would comply with Fulbourn Village Design Guide and Fulbourn Conservation Area Appraisal.
Affordable Housing 52. 33 of the 110 dwellings would be affordable to meet the local needs of Fulbourn. Under the approved outline consent S/0202/17/OL, officers considered and agreed that 30% affordable housing was considered acceptable. The outline planning application was supported by a development viability appraisal. This was secured within the Section 106 agreement as part of the outline planning consent 53. The proposed mix would comprise of 8 x 1 bed flats (24%), 16 x 2 flats (48%), 4 x 2 bedroom houses (12%) and 5 x 3 bedroom flats (15%). 16 of the units would be for shared ownership and 17 for affordable rented. 54. The proposal has been amended in terms of the affordable housing provision following the Housing Officers comments. The amendments comprise of four affordable dwellings being proposed, two of which would be affordable rent and two shared ownership, which provides a more appropriate mix of the affordable units across the scheme. The scheme also allows four private units to be flats encouraging diversity. The tenure mix across the site has been revised to ensure affordable rent and shared ownership units are mixed throughout the site, creating an inclusive community. The location of the affordable dwellings has been amended in which the affordable provision is not all sited in the north west corner but has been dispersed around the site with provision within apartment blocks A and B which lie more centrally within the site and to the eastern part. This accords with the S106 Agreement which allows up to 20 affordable units to be clustered together. The mix of textures for the affordable housing also allows dispersal between the shared ownership and affordable rent provisions.
55. The proposed amendments are considered to address the Housing Officers comments in regard to the tenure mix meeting the requirement of 70% affordable rent and 30% shared ownership, provision of a mix of houses and flats for the affordable housing, provision of flats for private market house and dispersal of the affordable units so that they are not all located to the north west of the site.
56. The dwelling size mix, tenure mix and location are considered acceptable and would accord with local needs within Fulbourn and across the district. 57. The proposal will meet the requirement of providing 5% of homes to be built to the accessible and adoptable dwellings M4(2) standard. Plots 11 and 12 (affordable rented), plots 7 and 48 (shared ownership) and plots 79, 85 and 86 (market) will be M4(2) compliant which is split evenly between the affordable and market homes.
58. The Council’s Housing Officer has confirmed their support for the mix, tenure, layout and clustering of the affordable housing proposed.
59. The proposal would therefore comply with condition 5 of the outline consent S/0202/17/OL, the S106 Agreement and Policy H/10 of the Local Plan.
Market Housing Mix 60. 77 of the 110 dwellings would be for sale on the open market. The market housing mix proposed is 23 x two bed units (30%), 31 x three bed units (40%), 19 x four bed units (25%) and 4 x five bed units (5%).
61. The market homes in developments of 10 or more homes will consist of at least 30% 1 or 2 bedroom homes; at least 30% 3 bedroom homes; and at least 30% 4 or more bedroom homes; with a 10% flexibility allowance that can be added to any of the above categories taking account of local circumstances.
62. Officers are satisfied that the proposed development would provide for an appropriate market mix of housing on the site, nothing that the mix would accord with Policy H/9 of the Local Plan. 63. The proposal would therefore comply with condition 5 of the outline consent S/0202/17/OL and Policy H/9 of the Local Plan
Residential Space Standards
64. Policy H/12 of the Local Plan states that new residential units will be permitted where their gross internal floor areas meet or exceed the Government’s Technical Housing Standards – Nationally Described Space Standard (2015) or successor document
65. Given that the outline planning consent did not require the dwellings to be built to meet the residential space standards and this matter does not fall under the definition of the reserved matters for layout, appearance or scale of the development, the sizes of the rooms are considered satisfactory.
66. However, the proposed dwellings would meet the national space standards. The proposal would therefore comply with Policy H/12 of the Local Plan.
Open Space Provision
67. The Second Schedule of the Section 106 for the development requires the following areas of local equipped area of play and open space to be delivered on site, based on the number of dwellings of each type (by bedrooms) provided on the site:
- 902.9m² of Area of formal play space (LEAP)
- 902.9m² of Area of Public Open Space comprising informal play space
- 866.3m² of Area of Public Open space comprising informal open space.
68. A Landscape Management and Maintenance Plan (LMMP) has been submitted which has been informed by the requirements in the Section 106 Agreement. Reserved Matters Layout 69. As part of the Outline approval, parameter plans were approved under condition 4 which detailed the siting of the built form of the development.
70. The proposed layout shows three specific raised land parcels where development will be located. The proposed layout design principles reinforce the heart of the development, providing enclosure around key open spaces. The development is based around a main spine road running west to east through the site, with smaller roads being served off this. A crossing over the chalk stream is provided towards the centre of the site with two further pedestrian bridges to allow connectivity through the site. The proposed layout is considered to accord with Part 10 of the Village Design Guide by providing informal, interconnected streets, lanes and spaces.
71. The central open space ‘Meadow Park’ allows retention of views through the site from the village and Conservation Area, out towards the countryside and includes the public open space and play space. This accords with the Part 10 of the Fulbourn Village Design Guide which states that there should be views across the whole site towards countryside and local landmarks.
72. The chalk stream running north to south is to be retained and will form a key landscape and biodiversity feature within the site.
73. The proposal incorporates a pedestrian and cycle route with more informal walking routes. On the western field a more informal mowed path is proposed. The proposed layout integrates the site with the existing village through soft landscaping, road access to the west, cycle and pedestrian connections to the east, west and south.
74. Proposed car parking is provided on plot with private driveways to the front and side of dwellings alongside garages. Careful consideration has been given to the siting and position of the proposed apartment block parking, with hard and soft landscaping to reduce the visual impact, ensuring it is not visually dominant in the street scene.
75. The proposed layout is considered acceptable in terms of the parameter plans for the Outline consent and in regard to the character of the surrounding area. The proposed layout is considered to respond and enhance the natural features and integrate the design, landscape, ecology, surface water attenuation with the existing chalk stream and pump house pond.
Scale 76. The proposed height of the development will comprise of a mix of single storey garages, two storey dwellings and apartments, with part two and a half storey elements for the apartment buildings (block a and block b).
77. The approved parameter plan under the outline consent (condition 4) states residential development, up to 2.5 storey.
78. The scale and character of the existing residential development near the site presents a mixture of two storey, one a half storey and single storey of varying designs and footprints, with two storeys being the most prevailing scale of development. The nearby former Cambridge Water Company building is higher than this and The Swifts residential developments within Fulbourn are three storey’
79. The properties along Teversham Road are a mix of two storey and single storey, mainly detached. The properties along Hinton Road are mainly two storey, detached and semi-detached. Along Cow Lane and The Pines are two storey, mainly detached in reasonable sized plots. Cox’s Drove comprises of bungalows and two storey detached properties which leads to two storey commercial buildings.
80. The proposed height of the development is considered appropriate to the rural character and positioning of the site and area with the small part two and a half storey elements being sited centrally within the site, framing Meadow Park and also allowing views through the site from Poorwell Gardens and the Conservation Area and from the village into the site and wider countryside. The orientation of block a when viewed from Poorwell Water ensures that the two storey element will screen the two and a half storey height increase, ensuring it will not appear overbearing or bulky from this view. The proposal would accord with Policy 5 of the Village Design Guide 2020.
81. It is considered that the proposed height and scale of the development, predominantly two storey with the minimal two and a half storey elements, would accord with the Fulbourn Village Design Guide 2020 which states that 3 storey buildings are not typical of the village and should be considered with extreme care-they should be sited away from prominent frontages to minimise visual presence, and be articulated to avoid any bulkiness.
Appearance 82. The site lies within the ‘Poor Well Character Area’ as detailed in the Fulbourn Village Design Guide. This area as stated in the Design Guide is a unique highlight in Fulbourn and has links to the heritage of water management and the fenland agriculture and brings nature into the village. The area has a natural and agricultural feel, with the chalk stream, wetlands and ditches running along roads and contains industrial buildings and the grand Victorian former Cambridge Water Company (Part 4, Character Areas, Fulbourn Village Design Guide).
83. The Fulbourn Village Design Guide states that buildings should not be repetitive and provide a variety of building types and designs with coherent scale, massing and elegant simplicity in detailing. Chapter 11 of the Design Guide states that building in Fulbourn have simple forms and features and the character comes from the horizontal proportions and attractive diversity created by irregular building alignments and prominent roofs.
84. The proposal would provide three distinct character areas which would have their own appearance and character to provide a sense of place, these consist of village lane, meadow park and village street character areas. Village lane character area would be to the west, adjacent to Teversham Road, picking up the variety of scale, built form and materials of the High Street. This is evident in narrow frontages with hedges or defined walls, building type diversity and use of traditional materials.
85. Meadow Park character area surrounds the central open green space, framing the natural features of the site consisting of Meadow Park and the chalk streams. There is a range of built form with simple detailing and traditional materials. The proposed siting of the buildings allows open views of the countryside.
86. The Village Streets character area of the site lies to the east and bisected by the new Linear Park. With a strong linearity of the area, architectural reference is made to the residential developments in Fulbourn post industrial area comprising Station Road, Cambridge Road and Cow Lane. There are a variety of building types and when similar building types are used, different fenestration and roofing materials ensure a visual difference.
87. The proposed development provides mainly two storey, pitched roof approach throughout the site, with the two storey apartment buildings with part two and a half storey elements and single storey garages. The dwellings within the development incorporate variations in ridge heights. The tallest units on the site are approximately 11 metres in height (apartment block a and b, two and a half storey element) while the height of the majority of these two storey apartments consisting of the stepped down design are to be 9 metres and 8 metres in height. The two storey dwellings are approximately 9 metres.
88. The proposed design and appearance of the dwellings and apartment buildings includes a variety of house types, with material palettes and architectural language. The proposed variety of house types ensures that dwellings next to each other are not identical.
89. The Urban Design Officer in their comments do not object to the proposals and recommend that improvements to the character of the short streets (north and south of Linear Park) could be undertaken so that they are more like courtyards, with a narrower first section of the street which widens out to be more courtyard like to the end of the street. Given the space constraints of the site and impact this would have on the provision of landscaping, it is considered that the visual impact would not be unacceptable if this is not undertaken.
90. The Urban Design Officer in their comments recommended that the shared surface street is extended beyond plot 107 to 104 in the north east corner of the site to emphasise that pedestrian circulation is encouraged in this area which will contribute to the scheme and algin the loop road. Given the pavement along the dwellings to the north of the site, pathway through Linear Park and the links to the north east of the site, the proposal as it stands is considered to provide sufficient pedestrian circulation.
91. Finally the Urban Design Officer comments that the elevational treatments of some apartments and houses needs to be improved in terms of their detailed design and materiality. They refer to the front elevation of the C2 house types lacking consistency, symmetry and balance, apartment block b requiring further openings or other features and colours and materials of 4 apartment blocks C1, C, D and D1 being repetitive in their appearance. It is considered that given the internal requirements of the proposed dwellings, provision of further windows prohibits the internal use of these dwellings. The comments of the Urban Design Officer are noted, however on balance it is considered that the proposed design and elevational treatment of the house and apartment types have been amended and are acceptable in terms of the visual impact.
92. The proposed design and appearance of the development is considered to accord with Part 10 of the Village Design Guide by not being repetitive and providing a variety of building types and designs. The overall appearance and detailing of the proposed units are considered acceptable and provide a variety of interest. Officers consider it reasonable and necessary to impose a condition requiring details of materials for the proposed dwellings.
93. Comments have been received in regard to the proposed apartment buildings and the design being urban and not appropriate for the existing character and identity of the rural environment. It is acknowledged the proposal will provide several apartment block buildings. The proposed design and appearance with the stepped roof levels and heights are considered to reduce the visual impact. The proposed design, appearance and siting are considered to be appropriate in terms of visual amenity and rural setting of the site, given the apartment buildings will be centrally located, away from the north rural open countryside.
94. The proposed design of the dwellings are considered to provide a variety and mix, which corresponds with the rural character of the area. The proposals are considered to accord with the Fulbourn Village Design Guide by not being repetitive, providing a variety of types and design and Policy HQ/1 of the Local Plan.
Landscaping &Trees 95. Condition 7 of the outline consent requires full details of tree protection measures for all trees and hedges to be retained to be submitted and approved. Condition 12 requires a landscape and biodiversity management plan to be submitted. Condition14 requires a grassland mitigation strategy. All these conditions have been submitted as part of a separate discharge of condition application alongside this Reserved Matters application (S/3209/19/DC).
96. Notwithstanding the current discharge of condition application, this application is supported by a landscape masterplan, hard landscape strategy, details of the LEAP, details of the Pump House Garden, planting strategy, hard and soft landscape plans.
97. The site houses a delicate wildlife area of chalk streams which provides a natural green corridor from the countryside to the village and is relatively flat in its level. The eastern part of the site is screened with thick hedging and trees. To the southwest there is the neglected pumphouse garden which has a neglected pond. To the north and west, the site is fairly well screened with substantial mature trees.
98. Fulbourn village as detailed in the Village Design Guide Part 5 as having a landscape setting of the village ‘set among trees’, with views and direct access to the countryside from within the village and being typical of tall trees, hedgerows and rural planting in the build area
99. In terms of hard landscaping, the development is considered to complement the local context and emphasise the hierarchy of public and private spaces across the site.
100. The application has been subject to formal consultation with the Council’s Landscape Officer and Trees Officer who are supportive of the proposal. Amended landscaping plans have been received in which increased landscaping has been incorporated within the street scene to break up parking and given a tree lined street scene to the north west corner of the site. Landscaping has also been improved to make the proposal more appropriate in terms of visually and its layout, with trees shown in strategic locations at the end of cul-de-sacs to create a green edge when viewed from roads and the number of trees proposed has increased. 101. The Council’s Landscape Officer has commented that further details in terms of the cycle parking buildings and the vehicular bridge are required. These details can be conditioned.
102. The Council’s Tree Officer has commented that the proposals are acceptable in terms of the provision of trees and recommends a condition for 3D tree pits for those trees whose potential semi-mature rooting zone will be more than 50% hard surfacing.
103. Comments have been received from neighbours that the proposed planting plan does not comply with the approved parameter plan, with areas required for retained or additional planting not being in accordance with the details now proposed. The proposed landscaping is considered to accord with the parameter plans approved.
104. Officers consider that the proposed landscaping would accord with policy HQ/1 of the Local Plan, which seeks to secure high quality landscaping and public spaces that would integrate the development in with the surroundings.
105. Officers consider the landscaping for the site is responsive to Fulbourn Village Design Guide 2019 and Policy HQ/1 of the Local Plan which seeks to Secure high quality landscaping and public spaces that would integrate the development in with the surroundings. Heritage Impact
106. The Conservation Area runs along the southern boundary of the site and includes the pumphouse garden. The pumphouse garden is overgrown with a pond and tree lined avenue. It originally formed part of the grounds of the historic waterworks (non designated heritage asset) and the driveway from the original gate lodge to the main pumping station building passed through this space. The pumping station has been converted to office accommodation and the gate lodge has become a private house.
107. In the committee report for the approved Outline consent (S/0202/17/OL), it states that: ‘Two small parts of the site lie within the Fulbourn Conservation Area. No development is proposed for these areas so there will be no harm to the conservation area Itself, However the Inspectorate in the appeal did accept that the site made some contribution to the Setting of the Conservation Area. It was deemed that the development resulted in “very minor adverse” impact on the setting of the Conservation Area and therefore a very minor impact on its significant harm. Harm could be further mitigated through the design of the development on site’.
108. As part of this application, a Heritage Statement has been submitted in which it seeks to demonstrate that the proposed design ensures no impact upon the adjacent Conservation Area. The impact on the setting of the Conservation Area will be assessed.
109 Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires the desirability of preserving or enhancing a Conservation Areas character or appearance.
110 The Fulbourn Conservation Area Appraisal states that development within the Conservation Area should respect the scale, pattern, materials, and boundaries of the existing settlement.
111. The Heritage Officer considers that the historic and architectural significance of this part of the Conservation Area both depend to a degree on an understanding of all the waterworks buildings and the landscape around them as a group. The buildings within the former pumping station, gate house and open space are identified as making a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, with the pumping station identified as a focal point as detailed in the Fulbourn Conservation Area Appraisal
112. The Heritage Statement accompanying the application acknowledges this and indicates that as part of the restoration of the waterworks grounds, the existing driveway would be retained. The Heritage Officer has commented that the detail of the treatment of the driveway is not clear and it is important that the integrity of the complete driveway route from the gates to pumping station remains perceptible and distinct from additional routes created as part of this development. The Office has requested a condition, requiring the details of the treatment of the driveway should be attached to any consent.
113. In the 2016 appeal (APP/A0530/W/15/3139730, paragraph 49), it was recognised that due to the physical proximity between the site and the Conservation Area, the site ‘should be serving as some part of the setting of the Conservation Area’.
114. The proposal has been assessed in terms of its impact on the setting of the Conservation Area and it is considered that the proposal given its character of detached and semi-detached dwellings would not result in a dense and continuous form of development, impacting on views from and in the Conservation Area.
115. The proposed retention of the green buffer of landscaping along the southern and eastern site boundaries of the site, mitigates any outward views from the Conservation Area. The proposed positioning of the apartment blocks with gable ends facing south towards the Conservation Area boundary, reduces the visual mass of the proposal in outward views northwards from the Conservation Area. The proposed design of the development is considered to be reflective of the character of the local area.
116. The proposal is not considered to result in significant harm to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Highway Safety and Parking Provision 117. Access was approved at the Outline stage, with approved vehicular access from Teversham Road and emergency access onto Cox’s Drove which is for emergency access and pedestrian and cycle access only. A number of comments have been received in regard to the proposed access for the site, on traffic levels in the area and on highway safety. The impact of the development in terms of access, traffic and highway safety was assessed under the outline consent.
118. Comments have been raised in terms of construction vehicles and movements. Condition 21 of the outline consent requires submission of a Traffic Management Plan which will detail the impact of construction on highway safety.
119. The Local Highways Authority in their comments stated that they will not be adopting any part of the development in its current format. The fact the Local Highways Authority may not adopt the proposed development is not a highway safety issue, this arrangement is not unusual for schemes of this nature.
120. The Local Highway Authority requested conditions in regard to submission of details of the proposed arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development and two 2 metre by 2 metre visibility splays as shown on plans B411-PL-DR-016Rev P01/ B411-PL-DR-017 Rev P01/ B411-PL-DR-018 Rev P01 shall be kept clear of all planting, fencing, walls and the like exceeding 600 mm high which have been recommended under conditions (e) and (f).
121. They also commented that the vehicular access (for 8 units or below if remaining private i.e. plots 74/81 and 64/71) should be constructed using dropped kerbs rather than the radii ones a shown. The structures in the vicinity of the central meadow space will require a commuted sum if brought forward for adoption. The Local Highway Authority would seek to adopted the proposed development until the proposed SUDS is managed by the Parish Council or another body with a successor. The use of a management Company to maintain apparatus that directly relations to drainage of surface water. The proposed car parking layout appears to show that the length of the plots: 1 /2 /20 89/95/96 and 97 driveways are.
122. The applicant has responded to the Local Highway Authority comments, confirming that the drainage strategy requires water to infiltrate into the permeable paving within these vehicular access and therefore the introduction of dropped kerbs and ramps will prevent the proposed operation of the surface water strategy. The change of surface from tarmac to block paving reinforces the message that accesses are shared between vehicles and pedestrians. The driveway lengths are designed to allow additional space for unloading and storage. These points of clarification are considered acceptable.
123. Each dwelling would have two off road car parking spaces to the front and side of dwellings which would meet the requirement of Policy TI/2 of the Local Plan.
124. The proposal has provided a mix of methods for cycle storage with provision within lockable garden sheds or garages of a suitable size or cycle stores for the apartment buildings.
125. The proposal, subject to the recommended conditions would accord with Policies TI/2, TI/3 and HQ/1 of the Local Plan and paragraphs 108 and 110 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Biodiversity
126. The ecological constraints of the site were considered under the outline planning application.
127. The site is dominated by pasture grassland with given species of orchid recorded as well as adders tongue fern, common lizard, grass snake, bats and nesting birds. The proposed layout of the scheme has been designed to retain higher quality areas of grassland and provide a permanent home for key botanical species within the landscaping. The existing chalk stream bisects the site from north and south. The proposal seeks to preserve the natural habitat an eco- system along the chalk stream with planting enhancement.
128. A landscape and Biodiversity Management Plan in relation to condition 12 of the outline consent and Scheme of Grassland Mitigation and Translocation in relation to condition 14 of the outline consent have been submitted as part of a separate discharge of condition application alongside this Reserved Matters application (S/3209/19/DC). The Ecology Officer has commented that they are satisfied with the grassland translocation strategy, reptile translocation strategy and the chalk stream habitat restoration plan enhances the habitat and will return it to a more natural state than the existing overgrown condition. The restoration will increase biodiversity and help encourage aquatic species in the area.
129. Given the above, and that the proposal will provide double the provision of bat, bird and hedgehog boxes required by the supplementary planning document, re-natural-ising the chalk stream at the centre of the site, enhancing the gardens to the south, and providing reptile habitat enhancements to the north, Officers consider the scheme will provide sufficient biodiversity net gain. The proposal would accord with Policy NH/4 of the Local Plan, Biodiversity SPD and paragraphs 170, 174 and 175 of the National Planning Policy Framework which requires development to enhance, restore and add to biodiversity with opportunities taken to achieve a net gain in biodiversity through the form and design of development.
130. The proposal is considered to accord with the additional guidance for Teversham Road Site in the Fulbourn Village Design Guide by respecting the sensitive natural location of the site and ensuring protection of the chalk stream and natural green corridor of the site. Flood Risk/Surface Water Drainage 131. The site is situated within flood zone 1 (low risk) as identified by the Environment Agency. The ground conditions and water table level means that the site does hold water in times of peak events. There are three watercourses/ditches which run northwards through the site beneath the railway line and joins Cawdle Ditch some 1.3km north of the site, the ditch along the southern boundary of the western section of the site which joins the central watercourse and Teversham Road ditch which runs northwards along Teversham Road and joins Cawdle Ditch. A chalkstream runs through the centre of the site running south to north. The site is affected by surface water flooding during periods of extreme rainfall and, as noted by the Council’s Drainage Officer and LLFA, there is significant surface water flooding on the site which was modelled and assessed at the Outline Planning application stage. 132. As approved in the Outline Consent and in the parameter plan, three raised platforms at levels of 300-500mm above existing ground level are proposed to manage flooding and protect the proposed dwellings as worse-case flood depths are in the 200 mm to 500 mm depth band. The boundary of each platform includes the surface water runoff attenuation facility for each platform.
133. The three attenuation facilities in the eastern part of the site comprise both sub- base replacement crates and bio-retention basins. The attenuation facilities for the western part of the site drains to the attenuation creates below the permeable paving. Runoff from the spine road will drain via a grassed filter drain and channel/aqueduct, to the existing pond in the pump house garden.
134. Maintenance of the surface water management and SUDs will be by a private management company. Condition 8 of the Outline Consent for which there is a current discharge of condition application S/3209/19/DC requires a detailed surface water drainage scheme for the site to be submitted based on the agreed Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) CCE/B411/FRA-03 September 2014 by Cannon Consulting Engineers to be submitted for approval. The condition states that the scheme shall include the long term ownership/adoption of the surface water drainage system and maintenance of the same.
135. The Lead Local Flood Authority and Sustainable Drainage Engineer in their initial comments raised concern regarding the final design of the development and whether the landscape proposals, highway design and building platform level have taken consideration of the surface water flooding approved at the Outline stage and how the surface water flow route is managed has been demonstrated. They requested that updated and revised modelling is provided to demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity on site for floodwater and that finished floor levels and external levels are defined to ensure that the dwellings will not flood.
136. Following amendments and additional information in the form of a Surface Water Drainage Strategy Addendum, Review of Surface Water Flood Management and surface water/overland flood flow model and finished floor levels in response to flood levels to respond to the comments from the Lead Local Flood Authority and Sustainable Drainage Engineer, details were submitted in which the Reserved Matters layout continues to allow space for the predicted surface water flood water within the site boundary. The proposed layout for this application follows the same principle which was established at the Outline stage in that westwards flow from the central storage area between the two parcels in the east of the site will be restricted. The LEAP will now not be affected by floodwater, with the lower part of the LEAP to allow for restricted flows to pass though and around the LEAP. The central improvement works to the central steam will allow for additional capacity for floodwater.
137. The Lead Local Flood Authority, Anglian Water and Sustainable Drainage Engineer consider the proposal is acceptable in terms of flooding and drainage. The Lead Local Flood Authority comment that the proposals are to drain surface water through permeable paving and attenuation basins around the development before discharging into the watercourse that flows through the centre of the site. The half drain times have been reduced, and there is adequate attenuation to receive the follow up 10 year storm within 24 hours of a 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) 7 day storm including climate change. The Sustainable Drainage Engineer comments that the proposal shows that the proposed Road edge/footpath levels upstream of the 5 no. 150mm diameter pipes are above the 1 in 100 year plus 40% climate change and 1 in 1000 year return period flood levels. In the south-east corner of the site, where the 1 in 100 year plus 40% climate change and 1 in 1000 year return period flood levels are close to the proposed road edge/footpath levels, finished floor levels are 150mm above the highway level and therefore acceptable in terms of flood risk and drainage concerns.
138. The Lead Local Flood Authority have recommended three informatives relating to flow restriction culverts, Ordinary watercourse consent and pollution control and officers consider it appropriate to include these.
139. The Parish in their comments raise concerns regarding the long term maintenance of surface water drainage. As detailed above, condition 8 of the Outline Consent requires details of the long term ownership/adoption of the surface water drainage system and maintenance of the same. The statutory consultees support the details provided for the discharge of condition 8 under application S/3209/19/DC.
140. Overall, given the comments of Anglian Water, the Lead Local Flood Authority and the Sustainable Drainage Engineer, officers are satisfied that the proposal would accord with Policies CC/7, CC/8 and CC/9 of the Local Plan which requires developments to have an appropriate sustainable foul and surface water drainage systems and minimise flood risk.
Contamination
141. The site has a relatively low risk historical use as agricultural land and is being developed into a sensitive end use (residential). A Geosphere Phase I & II Report were submitted as part of the Outline Consent and concluded that no conditions were required. 142. The proposal would therefore comply with Policies CC/7 and SC/12 of the Local Plan.
Residential Amenity Neighbouring Properties
143. The properties with the greatest potential for impact from the proposed development are the existing properties around the site at No.8 Teversham Road which lies to the north west and the neighbouring properties to the south at Nos. 60- 48 Cow Lane and No.3 Coxs Drove.
144. Paragraph 6.68 of the Council’s District Design Guide details that to prevent the overlooking of habitable rooms to the rear of residential properties and rear private gardens, it is preferable that a minimum distance of 15 metres is provided between windows and the property boundary: for two storey residential properties, a minimum distance of 25 metres should be provided between rear or side building faces containing habitable rooms, which should be increased to 30metres, for 3 storey residential properties.
145. No.8 Teversham Road is a bungalow and lies to the north west of the site, with proposed units 1-5 being sited to the side and rear of this neighbouring property. To the front of this neighbouring property lies a garage. Unit 1 would be sited to the side of No.8 Teversham Road, but forward of the front elevation and to the side of the garage. At its nearest point, unit 1 would be approximately 10 metres from this neighbouring dwelling. The rear elevation of Unit 1 would face towards the garage with rear dining room patio doors, a window serving this area and window serving the living room at ground floor and two bedroom windows at first floor with a bathroom window. Given proposed plot 1 would be sited to the side of the front garden of this neighbour and not aligned with the side elevation, with the substantial mature tree boundary being retained, the proposal is not considered to result in significant harm to the amenity of this neighbour.
146. Plots 2 and 3 would be sited obliquely to the side of No.8 Teversham Road. Plot 2 would be sited approximately 22 metres from the side of No.8 Teversham Road, with plot 3 being approximately 25 metres. Within the rear elevations of Plots 2 and 3 would be ground floor patio doors and a window serving a dining/living room. At first floor level would lie two first floor bedroom windows. Given the distance and that proposed plots 2 and 3 would be offset with oblique views to the end part of the rear garden of the neighbour at No.8 Teversham Road, the proposal on balance is not considered to result in significant harm to the amenity of the neighbour.
147. Proposed plot 4 would lie further away to the rear of No.8 Teversham Road. The proposed single storey rear element of plot 4 would be sited approximately 20 metres from the boundary of the neighbour with the two storey element being 23 metres from the boundary. Within the rear elevation of unit 4 would lie a living room patio doors and a utility room door at ground floor level. At first floor level would lie two bedroom windows and a hallway window. Given the distance and oblique angle, the proposal has been assessed in terms of loss of privacy and is considered acceptable in terms of neighbour amenity.
148. To the rear of the neighbour at No.8 Teversham Road would lie proposed plot 5. This proposed dwelling would lie side on to the rear elevation and rear garden of this neighbouring property. Within the side elevation of proposed plot 5 would lie two first floor windows serving an ensuite and bathroom. Given these serve non- habitable rooms, the proposal is not considered to result in any loss of privacy to this neighbour. Proposed plot 5 would be sited 6 metres from the common boundary with No. 8 Teversham Road, being 14 metres from the rear elevation of this neighbouring dwelling. The District Design Guide states that where blank walls are proposed opposite windows to habitable rooms, this distance can be reduced further, with a minimum distance of 12 metres between the wall and any neighbouring windows that are directly opposite. The proposed location of plot 5 is on balance considered to be sited a sufficient distance to not result in significant harm in terms of privacy and overbearing impact. Proposed plot 5 would be sited to the south of No.8 Teversham Road. Given the distance, the proposal has been assessed in terms of loss of light and on balance is considered acceptable to the amenity of nearby residents
149 No.3 Cox’s Drive lies to the south of the site. This neighbouring property would be set approximately 17 metres from proposed unit 86. The neighbour in their comments has raised concern regarding loss of privacy and overshadowing to their dwelling. Within the side elevation of proposed unit 86 would lie a secondary ground floor side kitchen window and an ensuite window at first floor. Given the main windows serving the habitable rooms would be in the front and rear elevations, the proposal has been assessed in terms of loss of privacy and the impact is not considered unacceptable to this adjacent neighbour. The neighbour also raised concerns regarding overshadowing. Given the significant distance of unit 86 from the neighbour and that there would be a large area of open ground in between, the proposal is not considered to result in significant harm to the amenity of this neighbour through overshadowing.
150. The neighbour at No.3 The Pines has raised concern regarding loss of privacy from the proposed development, with other concerns raised from neighbours in particular regard to loss of privacy to The Pines from proposed apartment block A. At its nearest point, apartment block A would be sited approximately 37 metres from No.3 The Pines and approximately 31 metres from No.2 The Pines. The nearest point of apartment block A is the west elevation, there would be first floor windows in the side, west elevation which would serve a balcony serving the living room and dining room and two windows serving the primary and secondary bedrooms. The proposed two and a half storey element would be sited within the northern corner of apartment block A, at distance of 45 metres from No.2 The Pines and approximately 54 metres from No.3 The Pines. Apartment block A would face towards the rear elevation and garden area of No.2 and No.3 Cox’s Drove, however, given the distance of the siting of apartment block A, the proposal would accord with the requirements of the Council’s District Design Guide SPD.
151. The neighbour at No. 60 Cow Lane has raised concerns regarding overlooking and loss of privacy from the proposed development. Plots 68, 67 and 58 would be the nearest dwellings from this neighbouring property. Proposed plot 58 would be sited approximately 12 metres at its nearest point from the common boundary with No. Cow Lane and approximately 35 metres at the nearest point from this neighbouring dwelling. Within the side elevation of plot 58 would be a ground floor bay window with ensuite window at first floor. Given the above, the proposed unit 58 is not considered to result in any harm to the amenity of No.60 Cow Lane.
152. Proposed plot 67 would be site approximately 10 metres from the common Boundary with No.60 Cow Lane and approximately 24 metres from the rear of No. 60 Cow Lane. At ground floor level within the side elevation of plot 67 would lie a ground floor bay window with an ensuite window at first floor level. The proposal has been assessed in terms of loss of privacy and overlooking to the neighbour at No. 60 Cow Lane and is not considered to result in significant harm.
153. Proposed plot 68 would be sited approximately 10 metres from the common Boundary with No.60 Cow Lane and approximately 25 metres from the side of this neighbouring property. At ground floor level within the side elevation of proposed plot 68 would like a ground floor bay window serving a living room with another window serving a dining room. At first floor level would lie an ensuite window. Given the distance and that the first floor window in the side elevation would serve a non- habitable room, the proposal is not considered to result in significant loss of privacy or overlooking to warrant refusal.
154. The neighbour at No.58 Cow Lane has raised concerns regarding blocking of light and overlooking. The nearest properties would be proposed plots 68 and 77. Within the side elevations of these proposed dwellings would be a bay window serving a living room and another window serving a dining room. At first floor level would lie an ensuite window. Given no habitable windows would face towards this neighbour, the proposal is not considered to result in significant harm to the amenity.
155. This neighbour raises concerns regarding blocking of light. Proposed plot 68 would be approximately 10 metres from the common boundary and approximately 30 metres from the neighbouring dwelling. Proposed Plot 77 would be approximately 18 metres from the common boundary and approximately 33 metres from the neighbouring dwelling. Given the distance, the proposals are not considered to result significant loss of light.
156. The neighbour at No.58 Cow Lane in their comments state that no buildings should be higher than two storeys high. The majority of dwellings on the site would be two storey which would accord with existing development patterns in Fulbourn. The proposal would entail two parts of the apartment blocks being two and a half storey. Given the limited extent of the two and a half storey elements proposed and that the elements are sited centrally within the site, there would be limited impact to adjoining neighbours and to the visual amenity of the wider area and Conservation Area setting.
157. The proposal is not considered to result in harm to the amenity of the neighbouring properties which serve Nos. 56-48 Cow Lane, given the distance of the proposed plots from the common boundaries and open space between.
158. Comments have been received from neighbouring properties in terms of the proposed lack of provision of a visual and physical barrier between the development and the houses in Cow Lane serving Nos. 48-60. Along this boundary as detailed in the landscaping plans there will be proposed native buffer planting, with trees retained where possible and a combination of the habitat retention and translocation areas and existing grassland and scrub retained.
159. The resident of No. 51 Caraway Road has raised concern regarding residential amenity and the scheme. Given the significant distance from this property, the proposal is not considered to result in any harm to this dwelling.
160. The proposal is considered to accord with Policy HQ/1 of the Local Plan and the District Design Guide SPD in terms of separation distances regarding loss of privacy, overlooking and loss of light and which requires development to protect the health and amenity of occupiers and surrounding uses from development that is overlooking, overbearing or results in a loss of daylight.
Future Occupiers 161. Consideration is also given to the amenities of the future occupiers of the site. It is considered that the proposed internal layout of the site is such that it is not considered to significantly compromise the quality of the amenity afforded to each property.
162. The Urban Design Officer in their comments mention two cases of where the siting of two dwellings plot 6 to apartment block D1 and apartment block D1 to plot 16 do not meet the minimum distances of 12 metres between a blank wall and the windows to habitable rooms as detailed in paragraph 6.68 of the Council’s District Design Guide. The distances are 10.5 metres and 9 metres respectively. It is considered that given the site constraints and that these are the only two instances, given they only just fail to meet the 12 metre distance, it is on balance considered acceptable in these cases.
163. The Urban Design Officer in their comment’s requests increasing the rear garden area of plot 57 to meet the criteria for minimum residential amenity space in the District Design Guide. The Design Guide requires dwellings with three bedrooms or more to have private garden space of 80m2 in a rural setting. Plot 57 would meet this, and it is considered an acceptable size.
164. The proposal is considered to accord with Policy HQ/1 of the Local Plan and the District Design Guide which requires development to protect the health and amenity of occupiers and surrounding uses from development that is overlooking, overbearing or results in a loss of daylight.
Noise 165. The site lies adjacent to the railway line and Breckenwood Industrial Estate. As part of the Outline consent, condition 19 requires with any reserved matters application submission of a noise mitigation/insultation scheme to protect the occupants externally and internally. Condition 20 of the outline consent requires no dwellings or private gardens be sited within the residential 50 metres no build /exclusion zone unless and until a detailed noise mitigation strategy and/or detailed insulation scheme to address the off-site operational noise from Breckenwood Industrial Estate has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Condition 4 of the outline consent, approves plan title 50m Exclusion Zone B.
166. As part of this Reserved Matters application, a Noise Assessment has been submitted. Within the proposed site layout plan, blocks C, C1, D, D1 would be sited within the 50 metre exclusion zone. Notwithstanding this, the Environmental Health Officer has confirmed that the submitted Noise Assessment details that with suitable mitigation, these proposed apartment blocks effectively provide a shielding effect to the rest of the development, whilst providing the residents of these units with an appropriate level of noise protection to their amenity, allowing building within the 50 metre exclusion zone.
167. To maintain satisfactory noise levels within the residential blocks nearest to the Breckenwood Industrial Estate, there is a need for mechanical ventilation with Heat Recovery (MVHR) within these units. No background ventilators will compromise the external façades of blocks C, C1, D and D1.
168. The Environmental Health Officer supports the proposed siting of dwellings within the 50 metre exclusion zone and the noise assessment details provided.
169. The proposal has been assessed in terms of noise and residential amenity and is considered acceptable and would therefore comply with Policy SC/10 of the Local Plan.
Open Space 170. Meadow Park provides a landscape link across the chalk stream to connect the east and western parts of the site. The western field of Meadow Park forms one of the principal reptile and grassland receptor sites with the eastern field adjoining Linear Park and incorporating the LEAP.
171. A Locally Equipped Area of Play (LEAP) is proposed at the centre of the site adjacent to Meadow Park, providing traditional and bespoke natural play equipment for children.
172. Within the site there is the linear park which extends east from Meadow Park, with large areas of landscaping and informal open space to provide for informal play and outside amenity space, including a meadow grassland, shrub and herbaceous planting and lawn.
Permeability 173. The site is accessed via a single point of access for vehicular traffic from Teversham Road. As part of the Outline consent, an emergency access and pedestrian and cycle access was approved onto Cox’s Drove, a plan was approved detailing the low planter hard measure to be built to deter use by non emergency vehicles under condition 4. The site layout as detailed in this reserved matters application provides primary and secondary roads and pedestrian and cycle routes and bridges within the site. On the western field around the dwellings an informal mowed path is proposed. The proposal will provide public access to Pumphouse Garden an area of public open space, to the southwest corner of the site, allowing a connection between the site and village. The proposal will accord with Policy HQ/1 of the Local Plan.
174. Comments have been received in regard to whether the emergency access onto Cox’s Drove will be used for refuse vehicles. It is only for emergency access with access for pedestrians and cyclists.
Sustainability
175. Policy CC/3 requires all new dwellings to reduce carbon emissions by a minimum of 10% through use of on-site renewable energy and low carbon technologies. Condition 27 of the Outline Consent requires a scheme for the provision of on-site renewable energy to meet 10% of the projected energy requirements.
Cows Lane/Cox’s Drove
176. A resident has raised concern regarding the lack of management and maintenance of the land on the corner of Cox’s Drove and Cow Lane. It is acknowledged that this piece of land is in the applicant’s ownership, however not within the development site (red outline). Therefore this is a separate matter to this application.
Self Build Dwellings
177. A comment has been received in regard to no provision being made for self build dwellings as part of the development. Outline consent was granted prior to the new Local Plan being adopted. Given this there are no requirements for self build provision.
Other Matters
178. A neighbour in their comments raised concern that this reserved matters application submitted does not accord with the outline planning permission and Condition 4 which approved five plans. On plan M06 rev E – Parameters Plan which details the layout at Outline, the neighbour raises concern regarding the position of proposed units 76 and 77 which they consider sits within the area for open space. The proposal put forward is considered to accord with the approved parameter plan, as units 76 and 77 would be within the area for residential development and not the open space as detailed in the approved parameter plan.
179. In addition concerns were raised that the proposed details are not in general accordance with the illustrative layout as required by condition 6 of the Outline consent, in relation to the location of units, the proposed planting, sensitive area and open space areas. It is acknowledged that there is development within the 50 metre noise exclusion zone however the acceptance of this has been detailed in the noise section of this report.
Planning balance and conclusion
180. The principle of residential development up to 110 dwellings on the site, has been established through outline planning consent (S/0202/17/OL).
181. Whilst the concerns of the Parish Council and local residents are acknowledged in relation to the design, layout, neighbour amenity, highway safety, drainage, biodiversity and landscaping no objections have been received from statutory consultees in relation to these matters.
182. Most of these matters were considered at outline stage and no adverse impacts were identified that could not be controlled or mitigated by way of conditions
183. The amendments are considered to further improve the quality of the scheme to ensure that it preserves the character and appearance of the area and fits comfortably within its rural context. The reserved matters details for appearance, layout, scale and landscaping of the development are considered acceptable by officers and the application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions.
184. The site is a relatively spacious and low-density development, with large areas being provided for landscaping, recreational space, open space and retention of the chalk stream.
185. The proposed development provides a high quality development with a variety of house types which draw on the design characteristic and architectural details of the existing village. The development provides a high-quality level of amenity to the future occupiers of the site with all properties meeting or exceeding national space standards, although not required by planning policy. Each property is afforded a generous area of private amenity space which meet or generally exceed the recommendations of the Council’s District Design Guide.
186. Taken together, the factors (and those detailed throughout the report) would accord with policy requirements from the Fulbourn Village Design Guide, Conservation Area Appraisal and the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan along with the District Council’s District Design Guide SPD.
187. The development of the site would result in the provision of 110 dwellings towards the Council’s 5-year housing land supply and the erection of 33 affordable units to help meet an identified local need.
188. Officers consider the reserved matters including the layout, scale, appearance and associated landscaping to be acceptable. The proposal would provide a high-quality scheme which would make a positive contribution to the local and wider context of the site and the character of the area, responsive to its edge of village location, providing a good level of amenity to the future occupiers of the site.
189. Having regard to applicable national and local planning policies, and having taken all relevant material considerations into account, it is considered that the reserved matters should be approved in this instance.
Recommendation
190. Officers recommend that the Committee approves the application, with the planning conditions and informatives set out below, with the final wording of any amendments to these to be agreed in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair prior to the issuing of planning permission.
Conditions
(a) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: M02 rev C – Site Boundary Plan A-P10-014 P1 – Site Layout Coloured Site Plan A-P10-015 P1 – Site Layout Housing Mix A-P10-016 P1 – Site Layout Building Heights A-P10-017 P1 – Site Layout Material Plan A-P10-018 P1 – Site Layout Refuse Tracking A-P10-019 P1 – Site Layout Road Hierarchy 28815-P11-10 P1 – A Floor Plans 28815-P11-20 P1 – B Floor Plans 28815-P11-60 P1 – F Floor Plans 28815-P11-61 P1 – F2 Floor Plans 28815-P11-62 P2 – F1 Floor Plans 28815-P11-70 P1 – G Floor Plans 28815-P11-81 P1 – H1 Floor Plans 28815-P11-110 P1 – Apartment Block C Ground Floor Plan 28815-P11-111 P1 – Apartment Block C First Floor Plan 28815-P11-112 P1 – Apartment Block C1 Ground Floor Plan 28815-P11-113 P1 – Apartment Block C1 First Floor Plan 28815-P11-120 P1 – Apartment Block D Ground Floor Plan 28815-P11-121 P1 – Apartment Block D First Floor Plan 28815-P11-122 P1 – Apartment Block D1 Ground Floor Plan 28815-P11-123 P1 – Apartment Block D1 First Floor Plan 28815-P11-130 P1 - Single Garage 28815-P11-131 P1 – Double Garage 28815-P13-10 P1 – A Village Lane Elevations 28815-P13-12 P1 – A Village Lane Elevations 28815-P13-13 P1 – A Village Lane Elevations 28815-P13-14 P1 – A Village Street Elevations 28815-P13-20 P1 – B Village Street Elevations 28815-P13-41 P1 – D1 Village Lane Elevations 28815-P13-50 P1 – E Village Lane Elevations 28815-P13-51 P1 – E1 Village Street Elevations 28815-P13-60 P1 – F Village Street Elevations 28815-P13-61 P1 – F1 Village Lane Elevations 28815-P13-62 P1 – F (plot 57) Village Street Elevations 28815-P13-63 P1 – F2 Elevations 28815-P13-71 P1 - G Village Lane Elevations 28815-P13-73 P1 – G Village Street Elevations 28815-P13-110 P1 – Apartment Block C Elevations 28815-P13-111 P1 - Apartment Block C1 Elevations 28815-P13-120 P1 – Apartment Block D Elevations 28815-P13-121 P1 – Apartment Block D1 Elevations TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-3002 P2 – Site Section 3 of 3 (Pump House Garden) TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-2001 P1 – Detail Plan Pumphouse Garden TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4010 P2 – Planting Key Plan B411-PL-SK-400 – Plot 55 and 61 Refuse Tracking B411-PL-DR-016 P01 – Pedestrian Visibility B411-PL-DR-017 P01 – Pedestrian Visibility Sheet 2 of 3 B411-PL-DR-018 P01 – Pedestrian Visibility Sheet 3 of 3 A-P10-010 P3 – Site Layout A-P10-011 P2 – Site Layout Floor Plan A-P10-013 P2 – Site Garden Areas and Depths A-P13-010 P2 – Site Elevations 1 of 2 A-P13-011 P2 – Site Elevations 2 of 2 28815-P11-30 P2 – C Floor Plans 28815-P11-40 P2 – D Floor Plans 28815-P11-50 P2 – E Floor Plans 28815-P11-90 P2 – Apartment Block A Ground Floor Plan 28815-P11-91 P2 - Apartment Block A First Floor Plan 28815-P11-92 P2 – Apartment Block A Second Floor Plan 28815-P11-100 P2 – Apartment Block B Ground Floor Plan 28815-P11-101 P2 – Apartment Block B First Floor Plan 28815-P11-102 P2 – Apartment Block B Second Floor Plan A-P13-30-P2 – House Type C1/C Elevations (Village Lane) A-P13-31-P2 – House Type C/C1 Elevations (Village Street) A-P13-32-P2 – House Type C2 Detached Elevations (Village Lane) A-P13-33-P2 – House Type C2 Detached (Village Street) A-P13-34-P2 – House Type C Elevations (Village Lanes) A-P13-40-P2 - House Type D Detached (Village Street) A-P13-52-P2 - House Type E2 Detached (Village Street) A-P13-90-P2 – Apartment Block A Elevations A-P13-100-P2 – Apartment Block B Elevations TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-2000 P3 - Detail Plan of LEAP TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-8000 P3 – Hard Landscape Outline Details TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-8001 P2 – Hard Landscape Outline Details Boundary Treatments TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-8500 P3 – Soft Landscape Details 7151809-MLM-ZZ-GF-DR-E-2100 P04 – New Site Wide External Lighting LUX Levels BS 5837:2012 Arboricultural Method Statement & Tree Protection Plan Revision B TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4013 P3 – Planting Plan – Sheet 2 of 6 B411-PL-SK-400 Rev P02 – Plot 55 & 61 Refuse Tracking TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4000_P7 – Planting Strategy Sheet 1 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4001_P7 – Planting Strategy Sheet 2 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4011_P4 – Planting Schedule TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4012_P3 – Planting Plan – Sheet 1 of 6 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4014_P3 – Planting Plan – Sheet 3 of 6 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4015_P3 – Planting Plan – Sheet 4 of 6 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4016_P4 – Planting Plan – Sheet 5 of 6 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-4017_P4 – Planting Plan – Sheet 6 of 6 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-1010 P5 - Hard Landscape Strategy Sheet 1 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-1011 P5 – Hard Landscape Strategy Sheet 2 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-3000 P3 - Site Sections Sheet 1 of 3 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-3001 P3 – Site Sections 2 of 3 TRF-CBA-1-GF-M2-L-8300 P2 – Play Feature Review of Surface Water Flood Management Aug 20 by HR Wallingford – submitted 12/8/20 Land Management and Maintenance Plan revision A September 2020 – submitted 30/9/20 B411-PL-SK-320 P06 – Flood Management Strategy – submitted 18/11/20 (Reason - To facilitate any future application to the Local Planning Authority under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990).
(b) No development above foundation level shall take place until details of external materials of construction for the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory in accordance with Policy HQ/1 of the adopted Local Plan 2018.)
(c) Notwithstanding the approved plans, details of external appearance of the proposed cycle storage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory in accordance with Policy HQ/1 of the adopted Local Plan 2018.)
(d) No development above foundation level shall take place until the details and appearance of the vehicular bridge have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory in accordance with Policy HQ/1 of the adopted Local Plan 2018.)
( (e) No development above foundation level shall take place until the details of the position and appearance of the electric meter boxes have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory in accordance with Policy HQ/1 of the adopted Local Plan 2018.)
(f) No development shall commence until details of the proposed arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (The streets shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved management and maintenance details until such time a Private Management and Maintenance Company has been established). (Reason: To ensure satisfactory development of the site and to ensure estate roads are managed and maintained thereafter to a suitable and safe standard in accordance with Policy HQ/1 of the adopted Local Plan 2018.)
(g) The two 2.0 x 2.0 metres visibility splays as shown on the drawing numbers: B411-PL-DR-016Rev P01/ B411-PL-DR-017 Rev P01/ B411- PL-DR-018 Rev P01 shall be kept clear of all planting, fencing and walls exceeding 600mm high. (Reason: For the safe and effective operation of the highway in accordance with Policy HQ/1 of the adopted Local Plan 2018).
(h) No new hard landscaping shall take place in the former waterworks grounds until a detailed plan for the treatment of the original driveway, its surface, edges, junctions with other paths, and terminations have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include details of interpretive material about the waterworks. (Reason: To safeguard the significance and visual impact of the Conservation Area in accordance with Policy NH/14 of the adopted Local Plan 2018.)
(i) Notwithstanding the approved plans, details of tree pit planting shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure the appearance of the development is satisfactory in accordance with Policy HQ/1 of the adopted South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018.)
Informatives
(a) Flow Restriction Culverts It is acknowledged that the five 150mm diameter culverts for flow restriction in the linear park storage area were approved within the outline approval. However, these are small culverts and must require a treatment stage upstream to avoid debris or litter from blocking the pipe system. It should be noted that the proposed 2m wide 0.1m high box culvert which is now included, is too small in height. This should be made larger or have a preliminary treatment stage upstream to ensure there is minimal risk of blockage.
OW Consent (b) Constructions or alterations within an ordinary watercourse (temporary or permanent) require consent from the Lead Local Flood Authority under the Land Drainage Act 1991. Ordinary watercourses include every river, drain, stream, ditch, dyke, sewer (other than public sewer) and passage through which water flows that do not form part of Main Rivers (Main Rivers are regulated by the Environment Agency). The applicant should refer to Cambridgeshire County Council’s Culvert Policy for further guidance: https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/business/planning-and-development/water- minerals-and-waste/watercourse-management/ Please note the council does not regulate ordinary watercourses in Internal Drainage Board areas.
Pollution Control Surface water and groundwater bodies are highly vulnerable to pollution and the impact of construction activities. It is essential that the risk of pollution (particularly during the construction phase) is considered and mitigated appropriately. It is important to remember that flow within the watercourse is likely to vary by season and it could be dry at certain times throughout the year. Dry watercourses should not be overlooked as these watercourses may flow or even flood following heavy rainfall.
(c) Assets Affected Anglian Water has assets close to or crossing this site or there are assets subject to an adoption agreement. Therefore the site layout should take this into account and accommodate those assets within either prospectively adoptable highways or public open space. If this is not practicable then the sewers will need to be diverted at the developers cost under Section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991. or, in the case of apparatus under an adoption agreement, liaise with the owners of the apparatus. It should be noted that the diversion works should normally be completed before development can commence.
(d) Foundation Pilling
In the event of the foundations for the proposed development requiring piling, prior to the development taking place the applicant shall provide the Local Authority with a report / method statement for approval detailing the type of piling and mitigation measures to be taken to protect local residents noise and or vibration. Potential noise and vibration levels at the nearest noise sensitive locations shall be predicted in accordance with the provisions of BS 5528, 2009 - Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites Parts 1 - Noise and 2 -Vibration (or as superseded). Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Background Papers
The following list contains links to the documents on the Council’s website and / or an indication as to where hard copies can be inspected.
South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD’s) Planning File References: S/3209/19/DC, S/0202/17/OL, S/2273/14/OL (APP/W0530/W/15/3139730)
Appendices
None.
Report Author:
Katie Christodoulides- Principal Planner Telephone: 07704 018469